The Library
Mechanical versus manual chest compressions in the treatment of in-hospital cardiac arrest patients in a non-shockable rhythm : a multi-centre feasibility randomised controlled trial (COMPRESS-RCT)
Tools
Tools
Tools
Couper, Keith, Quinn, Tom, Booth, Katie, Lall, Ranjit, Devrell, Anne, Orriss, Barry, Regan, Scott, Yeung, Joyce and Perkins, Gavin D. (2021) Mechanical versus manual chest compressions in the treatment of in-hospital cardiac arrest patients in a non-shockable rhythm : a multi-centre feasibility randomised controlled trial (COMPRESS-RCT). Resuscitation, 158 . pp. 228-235. doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.09.033
|
PDF
WRAP-Mechanical-versus-manual-chest-compressions-cardiac-on-shockable-rhythm-Couper-2020.pdf - Publisher's Proof Version - Requires a PDF viewer. Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. Download (698Kb) | Preview |
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.09....
Abstract
Background
Mechanical chest compression devices deliver high-quality chest compressions. Early data suggests that mechanical devices may be superior to manual chest compressions in adults following an in-hospital cardiac arrest patients. To determine the feasibility of undertaking an effectiveness trial in this population, we undertook a feasibility randomised controlled trial.
Methods
We undertook a multi-centre parallel group feasibility randomised controlled trial (COMPRESS-RCT). Adult in-hospital cardiac arrest patients that were in a non-shockable rhythm were randomised in a 3:1 ratio to receive mechanical CPR (Jolfe AB/Stryker, Lund, Sweden) or ongoing manual CPR. Recruitment was led by the clinical cardiac arrest team.
The primary study outcome was the proportion of eligible participants randomised in the study during site operational recruitment hours. Patients were enrolled under a model of deferred consent. We report data using descriptive statistics, point estimates and 95% confidence intervals.
Results
Over a two-year period, we recruited 127 patients across five UK hospitals. We recruited 55.2% (95% CI 48.5%–61.8%) of eligible study participants in site operational recruitment hours. Most participants were male (n = 76, 59.8%) with a mean age of 72 (95% CI: 69.9–74.9) years. Median arrest duration was 18 (IQR 13−29) minutes. In patients randomised to mech-CPR, median time from CPR start to device deployment was 11 (IQR 7−15) minutes. ROSC was achieved in 27.6% (n = 35) participants and 4.7% (n = 6) were alive at 30-days.
Conclusion
COMPRESS-RCT identified important factors that preclude progression to an effectiveness trial of mechanical CPR in the hospital setting in the UK. Findings will inform the design of future in-hospital intra-arrest intervention trials.
| Item Type: | Journal Article | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subjects: | R Medicine > R Medicine (General) R Medicine > RC Internal medicine |
||||||||
| Divisions: | Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School | ||||||||
| Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): | Cardiac arrest , Cardiac arrest -- Treatment, Cardiac resuscitation, Electric countershock, Life support systems (Critical care) , CPR (First aid) , Clinical trials | ||||||||
| Journal or Publication Title: | Resuscitation | ||||||||
| Publisher: | Elsevier Ireland Ltd | ||||||||
| ISSN: | 0300-9572 | ||||||||
| Official Date: | January 2021 | ||||||||
| Dates: |
|
||||||||
| Volume: | 158 | ||||||||
| Page Range: | pp. 228-235 | ||||||||
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.09.033 | ||||||||
| Status: | Peer Reviewed | ||||||||
| Publication Status: | Published | ||||||||
| Access rights to Published version: | Open Access | ||||||||
| RIOXX Funder/Project Grant: |
|
Request changes or add full text files to a record
Repository staff actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
